Now you know. Anywhere in London it is an offence to park anywhere but on the carriageway. Not pavements, grass verges vehicle crossovers. basically leave your car on the road unless you see signs like these

The footway parking ban is primary legislation passed by parliament. The council can dis-apply this ban only by a resolution of the council, then when they do, they have to sign it correctly

Make a challenge along these lines.

dear Mr parking

I challenge the issue of PCN number xxxxxxxxxx.

I parked my vehicle outside my home across my dropped footway, i was parked in the same manner as all other vehicles. A manner encouraged by the council by the presence of parking bays marked partly on the pavement.

These markings are for resident parking bays. It seems clear to me that as my property benefits from a dropped kerb no bay could be marked. and parking as I did was the correct method for the area

In order to make an informed decision as regards the validity of this PCN, i need to understand the regulations behind it. That the council have made a resolution did applying the 1974 act seems to be a forgone conclusion. What is not is the extent of that did application.

I will require with any rejection of this challenge a copy of the resolution did applying the ban and also a copy of the secretary of states authorisation allowing the council not to sign the de restricted area in accordance with TSRGD

regards etc

Before you add the bit about signs check out the road GSV is a bit dated

Now you know. Anywhere in London it is an offence to park anywhere but on the carriageway. Not pavements, grass verges vehicle crossovers. basically leave your car on the road unless you see signs like these

The footway parking ban is primary legislation passed by parliament. The council can dis-apply this ban only by a resolution of the council, then when they do, they have to sign it correctly

Make a challenge along these lines.

dear Mr parking

I challenge the issue of PCN number xxxxxxxxxx.

I parked my vehicle outside my home across my dropped footway, i was parked in the same manner as all other vehicles. A manner encouraged by the council by the presence of parking bays marked partly on the pavement.

These markings are for resident parking bays. It seems clear to me that as my property benefits from a dropped kerb no bay could be marked. and parking as I did was the correct method for the area

In order to make an informed decision as regards the validity of this PCN, i need to understand the regulations behind it. That the council have made a resolution did applying the 1974 act seems to be a forgone conclusion. What is not is the extent of that did application.

I will require with any rejection of this challenge a copy of the resolution did applying the ban and also a copy of the secretary of states authorisation allowing the council not to sign the de restricted area in accordance with TSRGD

regards etc

Before you add the bit about signs check out the road GSV is a bit dated

Taken in part or as a whole it is still wrong. we can quote Barnet vs the parking adjudicator and without reading the case they quote the mis stating of the statutory time frame is quoted and found to be a PI.I would be carrying on

It's rather aggressive - I would tone it down a bit. I would add something like 'As I know the council is committed to supporting people with disabilities, I am sure you would want to support me in my work with local people with learning disabilities, and the particular episode I needed to handle here."

Ok i understand, I will make the changes!

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Mon, 19 Mar 2018 - 14:43)

QUOTE (seanymac @ Mon, 19 Mar 2018 - 14:31)

OK Guys, this is what I am going to respond with - what changes should I do?

Hello

I received your email regarding your decision over an alleged parking offence which took place over 5 months ago and would like to continue my appeal via the following points:

1. You have unreasonably responded 5 months later. This is wholly unfair and as the council, you have a duty to act promptly and fairly alone. Cases such as mine have been won on this alone. 2. Whilst I appreciate your employee may have not seen myself alighting with a person who was undergoing an aggressive episode, it is unreasonable for me to put myself or the vulnerable person at danger of a)oncoming traffic b)them lashing out at myself c) them trying to injure themselves during an episode therefore whilst following training, the aim is to remove the person from danger and bring them into a safe zone where they have time to calm down. This meant I had taken the person into our facilities to calm them down and this takes as long as needed – It would be wholly unreasonable for me to leave that person in danger to repark my car. 3. Whilst you have stated can I provide evidence of this, I am bound against Data Protection to release any further information of this episode for risk of anyone within the council or information leaked being utilised against this vulnerable adult. What I can give you is information that I am indeed employed by a Mental Health and Learning Disability charity which has an address on the road where my car was found by your employee – Alternative Futures Group, 132 Manchester Road.I imagine this is sufficient information for you to no longer proceed against me. I imagine that in the mean time of you considering this information, the charge will be suspended until further notice.

i may change the first line to say add to your invitation to provide more information rather than appeal further

Your change is a good idea, also give some sort of proof of employment, the parking dept will not go searching for evidence

OK Guys, this is what I am going to respond with - what changes should I do?

Hello

I received your email regarding your decision over an alleged parking offence which took place over 5 months ago and would like to continue my appeal via the following points:

1. You have unreasonably responded 5 months later. This is wholly unfair and as the council, you have a duty to act promptly and fairly alone. Cases such as mine have been won on this alone. 2. Whilst I appreciate your employee may have not seen myself alighting with a person who was undergoing an aggressive episode, it is unreasonable for me to put myself or the vulnerable person at danger of a)oncoming traffic b)them lashing out at myself c) them trying to injure themselves during an episode therefore whilst following training, the aim is to remove the person from danger and bring them into a safe zone where they have time to calm down. This meant I had taken the person into our facilities to calm them down and this takes as long as needed – It would be wholly unreasonable for me to leave that person in danger to repark my car. 3. Whilst you have stated can I provide evidence of this, I am bound against Data Protection to release any further information of this episode for risk of anyone within the council or information leaked being utilised against this vulnerable adult. What I can give you is information that I am indeed employed by a Mental Health and Learning Disability charity which has an address on the road where my car was found by your employee – Alternative Futures Group, 132 Manchester Road.I imagine this is sufficient information for you to no longer proceed against me. I imagine that in the mean time of you considering this information, the charge will be suspended until further notice.

i may change the first line to say add to your invitation to provide more information rather than appeal further

Your change is a good idea, also give some sort of proof of employment, the parking dept will not go searching for evidence

Following the decision of Adjudicator Mr XXXXXXX in which my appeal was refused, I now wish to apply to the adjudicator for a review of the decision under Regulation 12 of the Schedule to The Road User Charging (Enforcement and Adjudication) (London) Regulations 2001. I am making this application within 14 days of the date of the adjudicator’s decision.

I am seeking review on the following ground(s):

The interests of justice require a review.My reasons for applying for a review are as follows:

The Adjudicator has ruled that "The reasonable motorist

would have no difficulty in working out how much they had to pay.

In this case it was a matter of law not fact. The adjudicator found I could work it out, The law says at4(8)(a)(ii) it must be shown on the PCN. contrary to the decision, this amount does not appear on the PCN. this is an error in factin this case it would appearIn finding that a motorist had the ability to work it out the adjudicator misdirected themselves as regards the law

It's either a statutory duty to display the amount clearly or it isn't.

The relevant case law here can be found in London Borough of Barnet Council, R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudicator [2006] EWHC 2357, at paragraph 41:

Mr Justice Jackson says at paragraph 41

"Prejudice is irrelevant and does not need to be established. The 1991 Act creates a scheme for the civil enforcement of parking control. Under this scheme, motorists become liable to pay financial penalties when certain specified statutory conditions are met. If the statutory conditions are not met, then the financial liability does not arise."

The 1991 Act has been replaced by the 2004 Act, but the relevant provisions are substantively the same. Either the statutory conditions are met, or they are not. Either the statutory condition that the amount of the penalty is on the face of the PCN, or it is not. The fact that one could work it out is irrelevant and does not change the fact that, because the statutory conditions are not met, there is no liability to pay the penalty.

I would like my application to be considered by the adjudicator at a postal hearing

If you can get confirmation from DVLA that you/ your BiL was not the owner on the contravention dates, send it to them. If not the acceptance by another council would be persuasive but not binding on another adjudicator

You have a clear ground, that has won in the past, the PCN informs you that if after 28 days from date of notice you have not paid then they may issue a CC. No they may not the regs only allow that they may issue a CC 28 days after date of service.

you are offered a web address to make reps and the declaration states to the best of my knowledge. IMO both would satisfy an adjudicator as to compliance.

As regards the grounds check schedule 1(4)(a) of the act. How can you comply with their demands for information if (i) applies and for the other two the regs do not require that you provide this info. You would however in making the claim need to substantiate on the balance of probability.

Same with the in control without permission. The regs do not require a report to the police in order to claim this just that you meet the required standard of proof

We had several successful appeals on the wrong Tribunal address being given when they changed from (Surrey?). I believe it was often a double whammy a PI and the papers being delivered OOT to the correct address (neither being the appellants fault).

This is a bus lane contravention with no PIs.

The appeal papers give the correct Nottingham address but is there any mileage in this?

Mick

I think so. The NOR is required to give the information the appeal form is not part of that

I'm not bothered about correcting errors - more about getting it cancelled soonest. As I thought the OP is concerned about the full penalty.

You might not be bothered, but if the council correct the error and lawfully refuse to exercise discretion to cancel at the NTO stage, the OP gets left with a PCN that can no longer be challenged at all.

QUOTE (Karganeth @ Sun, 18 Mar 2018 - 19:26)

Okay. I know this is probably pointless but my mum found a draft she made just before writing the final. I'll post it here anyways incase it has any value in this situation

QUOTE

I was issued a PCN on the 19/02/2018. I have a blue badge due to my disability which I use to park in order to get closer to the location I want to get to. Yesterday I simply forgot to display my blue badge while parking on double yellow lines. I have parked there numerous times as my daughter lives in the nearby apartment block, so the rules are familiar to me. Unfortunately I made a genuine mistake and forgot to display the blue badge; I did not park on double yellow lines out of pure ignorance and entitlement. I am well aware of the rules. I was very frustrated when realising what had happened as it was an easily preventable mistake. Though it was a mistake that I made. I would appreciate if you could take into consideration my appeal and consider my reasons.

Providing the wording of the actual informal representations is substantially the same, you have a banged to rights procedural impropriety, providing they don't address this properly at the NTO stage, I can't see how the council could win this.

I would still like to see the second page of the rejection.

To the PCN and challenge. If it was mine i think I would have a go at adjudication, I say this because I don not think the council will cancel. Two things make me say this. 1// they did not in the first instance and 2// they hate being told they are wrong, they cannot comprehend the possibility.

What I would do. Wait for the NTO and then send exactly the same words as formal representations. When they refuse go to adjudication, but state your dismay at not being listened to by the council, not mentioning PI in those terms.

I would do this even with the worry that I might lose. If I did i would not be looking to have to pay for about 6 months ( I would have to take all the time allowed to act but not be late)

I would already owe the council £65 and if I save the cost of a cup of coffee a week from now til the hearing I would save any difference and more if I had to pay, but if I win then I have £130 for a nice treat

You will next get an order for recovery, This will allow you to make a statutory declaration on limited grounds. One of these is that you made representations to the council but received no reply.

You would be making a statement of truth to a court, so if you sent your representations make this declaration. The court will then revoke the CC and the council will be required to refer to the tribunal for direction. This is usually to set a date for appeal

I'm a bit one foot in each camp here. On the one hand an argument for a PI can be made, it is also likely the council will further mess up and strengthen your hand, but on the other they may just correct the fail to consider enough to satisfy an adjudicatorif you send another pre NTO challenge, that is almost certain to be what happens. (whether they get it right or not).

wait for the NTO then draft representations with care (get help here, it will be forthcoming) Allude to the PI do not mention it directly.

An adjudicator may have a certain amount of sympathy, but be put off by a strong technical challenge whereas a heartfelt plea to both the council and tribunal might lead to the sympathetic finding you want